Political, Social, and Religious Ravings from a Texas Conservative

Welcome to My World

A friend (from work) asked me recently what I thought of the direction of the Republican Party and their chances in 2016. My response was an exasperated groan. All I see is the GOP establishment searching for the next moderate to force on us conservative serfs. Christie may be out (for now) but there are plenty more in the wings.

My friend didn’t share my gloom and doom. He’s hopeful, and thinks the GOP will finally nominate someone of substance (meaning conservative). There’s no doubt that his pick would be Rand Paul (being a true Libertarian); but he would be happy with a Cruz or Huckabee. I too would be happy with any of those three.

I just don’t think they have a chance. Don’t get me wrong; the problem isn’t the general election where they WOULD have a chance (despite the conventional moderate/liberal wisdom); they don’t have a chance in the primary because of the GOP establishment.

At least this gentleman realizes that time is running out. It’s now or never. Unfortunately this is something else we disagree on. I think it was now or never over a decade ago. Now it is most likely too late. With record numbers having bought into the social welfare state, and record immigration (and future legalization) of those with no concept of the real American dream or culture… never is here to stay.

What we really need in a candidate is someone with a fire in his gut, someone who wants a fight. I want this guy to call out the lefts policies as stupid, as evil, or both. I want a man who will not even try to hide the fact that the Main Stream Media is leftist, biased, and his enemy. If this candidate thinks he going to win by five points, I want that to piss him off and try and win by 20.

Does the above describe Romney, McCain, or Dole? Of course not, nor will it describe the likely milquetoast moderate the GOP establishment has in mind for 2016; thus my enthusiasm of an exasperated groan when I think of the future.

I told my friend that I understand his optimism. And I do; but only because I’ve been there… years ago…

One day, in the near future, we will meet again and one of us will say something to the effect of “Welcome to My World”. I hope that honor is his… but I don’t expect it.

7 Responses

You guys made Romney flip on gay marriage and state-run healthcare. That wasn’t enough deference?

>I just don’t think they have a chance

Agreed. Paul had a chance until he let the crazy out. Huckabee never had a chance.

>record immigration (and future legalization) of those with no concept of the real American dream or culture

Not fully correct. More people went back to Mexico last year than came over. As the Mexican economy improves, that will likely continue. Of course there are other countries involved, but they’re the big fish.

The conservative answer is “secure the border first.” OK, fine and good. How much do you want to spend? We’ve got 2,000 miles with Mexico, and 1,500 miles with Canada — and that’s not counting another 2,000 miles of coastline. We spent $12 billion on border security last year. How much is enough? How is success defined? I’ve never heard a plan. Just “secure the border first.” Which to me reads as, “We don’t want to talk about this sensibly. We don’t care if we have 12 million illegals we need to deal with, right now. Let’s talk fences and drones.”

What we need to do (moderate approach): Get the illegals registered, paying taxes properly, along with some kind of fine and temporary work visa (maybe 2 year cards). Deport them if they’ve committed felonies. Let them stay with their kids if they’ve been productive. Give their kids citizenship if they complete college or military service.

I assume that plan is just too hippie-ish for you guys, though. So, what’s your plan? Details please.

>> You guys made Romney flip on gay marriage and state-run healthcare. That wasn’t enough deference?

No… it’s not. We’re looking for heart and soul here. Not scraps from the establishment GOP table on high.

>> Agreed. Paul had a chance until he let the crazy out. Huckabee never had a chance.

Agreed? Actually probably not. I suspect you think they don’t have a chance in the general election. As I stated in the post I believe that conventional wisdom is wrong. If we can get a true conservative (one willing to fight) to the general election we will have a chance. It’s the “primary” election within the party that’s the big hurdle to the White House. This hurdle is due to establishment GOP types that take the advice of the left/media/swingers to “moderate”. THAT’s the problem we conservatives (and our candidates) must overcome.

If Paul, or Cruz, or Huckabee made it to the general election, they would have a chance (like Reagan). But that’s what I don’t see happening and the reason I suspect I will abandon the GOP in 2016.

>> More people went back to Mexico last year than came over.

Agreed. Obama’s incompetence 🙂 (and the resulting economy) has been a driving factor returning many illegal immigrants to “self-deport” back to Mexico and South America… but those tens of thousands are miniscule compared to the approximately 11-12 million that remain. The problem is twofold… the economic impact and the increasing dysfunction of the melting pot. E Pluribus Unum no longer applies when it comes to immigration.

I actually have little problem with your described plan. But stopping this from happening again in another decade or two has to be part of it. You want to dismiss that concern as stupid and/or irrational and then expect me to meet you somewhere in the middle. Of course, from my perspective that has been the very definition of moderation and compromise for decades.

>The problem is twofold… the economic impact and the increasing dysfunction of the melting pot.

I agree. I think the economic impact would be greatly reduced if we gave all the non-felons temporary greencards and collected income and social security tax.

>I actually have little problem with your described plan

Cool. That’s not the message I’m hearing from vocal conservatives, but perhaps they are a minority.

>But stopping this from happening again in another decade or two has to be part of it. You want to dismiss that concern as stupid and/or irrational and then expect me to meet you somewhere in the middle. Of course, from my perspective that has been the very definition of moderation and compromise for decades.

Actually, I agree with that, too. I don’t think concern over border control is stupid. I just think it’s difficult and expensive, given how big this country is, for a traditional law enforcement approach (armed agents, detention centers, drones).

I’d like to see it be easier to legally work here (temporarily), and stricter enforcement of labor safety/human rights laws. Illegals are attractive to certain employers because they will take below minimum wage and put up with a lot of crap — watch the documentary “Rape in the Fields” for a nice overview of how it works in California, Oregon, and Washington state. Reduce the incentive, and you’ll reduce the problem. It’s a lesson we seem to need to relearn across many subjects, from labor to drug enforcement. As Nathan himself has said, “the law is a blunt instrument.” We need to approach these social issues with better tools.

Of course, actually paying migrant workers correctly and treating them humanely would drive up the price of apple juice and chicken. I say, so be it… but I know many Americans would disagree, once they saw the budget impact. A lot of people have high values, until it actually costs them something. We still buy most of our stuff from China, even though their human rights record isn’t exactly stellar.

Issues: Immigration: The Republican Party is closer to your position than you think on this. You’re description of the Republican stance matches what the misinformation the MSM has pushed with great effect. (and still does in 2014)

Here is a line item list of where I think a majority of Republicans stand:

It is irrational to believe that we can deport all illegal aliens.

Step one in any immigration solution is to secure the border. Until this is done, no reform really matters. This is a major distinction between the Republicans and Democrats. The Democrats have no interest in border security. They view illegal immigration as a gold mine of votes and class warfare.

Current undocumented people should be registered and processed. Those who work and have contributed to society should be given work visas and a path to citizenship. A path that puts them behind all those who followed the legal process.

The legal process to becoming a citizen is a bureaucratic nightmare. It must be streamlined and revamped. At the same time we should revamp immigration policy to reflect who we want and who we don’t. I’d say Republicans would emphasize those who would work and integrate into our society.

As part of the process of registering and processing the undocumented. Those on perpetual welfare and those with any level of criminality of say drunk driving and above should be deported. Another key distinction between Democrats and Republicans. So if you agree with the above; you should have no problem voting Republican.

No, it doesn’t have major details; but it is a good outline of my (conservative) approach. I’ll try to expand on this in a future post.

But it’s not the MSM that’s shaping my opinion. It’s Tea Party Republicans. Every time this has been proposed by McCain and team (last time, under W), it’s conservatives in the House that have shot down any realistic/compromise plan by a bi-partisan committee as “amnesty.” That’s like saying, “I’d rather drown than get half the water out of this boat.” Let’s do what we can agree on, rather than nothing, for another decade.

>> But it’s not the MSM that’s shaping my opinion. It’s Tea Party Republicans. Every time…

My perspective on the whole ordeal is a bit different. I’ll describe it just to give you perspective on where I (and the Tea Party) are coming from.

Our perspective starts with Ronald Reagan. The exact same problem was addressed during the Reagan years… or more specifically the amnesty part of it was addressed. The left (Democrats) promised the security part of the deal would occur afterward and (you guessed it) they reneged and it never was. Thus a few decades later we get to address illegal immigration again.

The left is saying let’s do the same deal again; we really liked how that turned out. On security this time, their stance is varied from claiming security is already good, to claiming it’s impossible and too expensive, to promising to address it after the amnesty (just like last time). We on the right don’t trust their promises, which is smart when you consider their track record. We want security first.

The left argues that security will take too long and that the amnesty side needs to go ahead and happen or at least get started. This is a valid argument. So the right compromises and says, OK… but the progress of amnesty needs to be tied to the objective (measurable) progress of security. The left balks and says “No, give us what we want now and trust us to give you security later.” We are not fools (I’m speaking of conservatives here, not Republicans)… so that’s where the process breaks down every time.

This cues up the left’s spin machine (the MSM) who finds one or two on the right who say “deport them all”. These guys are the useful exceptions painted as the rule by the MSM to further the lefts cause.

Another problem is the “comprehensive” aspect of the process. The left has learned to do everything comprehensively so as to hide what is actually in the bills and pack them with pork and consequences they know the public would never go far. A perfect example of this would be the insurance company bailout hidden in the ACA. We on the right have wised up of this, and want things done piecemeal. But EVERY immigration proposal put out there over the past decade has been over a 1000 pages plus. Every one of them is unreadable, unfathomable, and untrustworthy.

So summing things up, the two requirements we on the right have are:
1) Security (objectively measured) at least tied to the process
2) Scrap the “comprehensive” tricks and let the sun shine on what is actually being done

Include those two things in immigration reform and I guarantee you can get enough support on the right to make compromise possible. Those two things have NEVER been offered.

The last attempt was in April 2013, when Rubio gave it a shot. The resulting bill was a behemoth mess… the same old stuff regurgitated yet again. And it failed… and the MSM kicked into gear and the Tea Party was once again labeled as being unreasonable and wanting to “deport them all”. And… nothing happened.

I (TexasLynn) personally came out against that 2013 “immigration reform” effort. And I wrote about why in this blog…
Link to Post: Comprhensive Billsh@t

Rick: “Let’s do what we can agree on, rather than nothing, for another decade.”

TexasLynn: “Unfortunately the fix being proposed is just more of the same old bullshit. Doing nothing would be better than that.”

I submit all this nothing is not the Tea Party’s fault. Doing what we can agree on kind-of argues for a moderate, one-task at a time approach. The left isn’t interested in that. Everything they put forth is hundreds if not thousands of pages. It always incomprehensible and full or pork and who knows what else. I would additionally say the left throwing out the same crap over and over again, ignoring or demeaning our concerns, and demanding we sit down, shut up, and support their “reform” indicates an attitude of “our way or nothing” much more than any of the efforts from the Tea Party. The difference is the left just has better spin doctors (and a lot more of them).

I stand by my assessment. When the left is ready to address this in a staged approach that doesn’t dismiss our concerns (security) out of hand… let’s talk… and maybe compromise.

Until then, we’ll do the same dance… A comprehensive bill that ignores security and thus doesn’t get our (conservative) support… for which we will be demonized. Being used to that, it has no affect on us so we say to the left “screw you” and… nothing gets done. I’m OK with that. Because, to date, nothing is better than what has repeatedly been put out there.